- Legal Charges & A Farmer Who Honors God And Respects Milk! by chef jem
11 y
11,304 3 Messages Shown
Blog: Raw Milk: The Whole Truth
Vernon Hershberger is a dedicated family farmer who is farming on his own private land in Wisconsin (known as the Dairy State). Thirteen months ago Vernon was charged with four misdemeanor counts for alleged violations of the Wisconsin food and dairy code. "On December 5, 2011, the state of Wisconsin filed criminal charges against ... Vernon Hershberger on four misdemeanor counts for violations of the state food and dairy code. Hershberger was charged with operating a retail food establishment without a license, operating a dairy farm as a milk producer without a license, operating a dairy plant without a license and violating a holding order issued by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP).":
http://www.realmilk.com/case-updates/vernon-hershberger/
I just discovered this evening that these "criminal charges" are a "legal impossibility".:
Black's (Fifth) shows:
"legal impossibility. As defense to criminal charge, this defense occurs when actions which defendant performs ... would not constitute crime."
Crimes are categorized in numerous ways. I think anyone who has the most basic understanding of this would agree that the legal charges (that have been presented against Vernon by the above State agency) are for "statutory crimes". According to the Bouvier Law Dictionary: "The statutes of a state define crimes in that state." If it is not defined in the state statutes as a crime then it is not a crime in that state. Again from Bouvier's - "Statutes declaring certain behavior criminal must accord with the constitution governing their enacting legislature." Is there a Wisconsin statute in accord with it's constitution that essentially criminalizes farming on one's own private land? If so I very much would like to see that statute!
Another critical consideration is that the full understanding of the (apparently simple) sentence concerning "that state" (quoted form Bouvier) requires certain knowledge of the Law that reveals exactly what "that state" consists of. Does the State of Wisconsin consist of land that includes that which is privately owned by Vernon Hershberger? There should be no assumptions ever made about what a state is, what a state has jurisdiction over and what the tangible reality is upon which a state's jurisdiction is based on and especially when we read the above line quoted from Bouvier's!
If a state DE CLAREs in it's state constitution that the officers of that state are required to subscribe an oath or declaration in support of the Constitution of The United States (as the supreme law of the land in that state) then that is the most significant clue as to what the state consists of. The only way to have the United States Constitution as "the supreme law of the land" within a state is for that state to have land that is owed by or under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the United States. Is all of Wisconsin land owned by the United States or subject to the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the United States? All the people living in Wisconsin need to know this! (Article IX in the Wisconsin Constitution addresses Property of the State.) It will be people who are living in Wisconsin who will make up the jury, if there is a trail against Vernon.
I was inspired to search the term: "impossibility" in two of my law dictionaries and glad I did! After reading both Black's and Bouvier's I am convinced that the charges against Vernon Hershberger are a legal impossibility and that on that basis alone they should be dismissed.
This defense appears to be the most directly pertinent to the charges. IMO this defense squarely responds to the charge (without any evasion) and tells the truth about the impossible nature of the charge against the accused. In Vernon's case there is also the issue of the fact that there is no contract with the state to perform anything at all! The lack of a contract also makes the charge a legal impossibility, IMO.
|
|
|
chef jem
|
|
- Re: Legal Charges & A Farmer Who Honors God And Respects Milk! by kerminator
11 y
3,471
Great article...
When did the gov't become the people?
|
|
|
kerminator
|
|
- Re: Legal Charges & A Farmer Who Honors God And Respects Milk! by Mixologist
11 y
4,335
I’'m a very happy member of Vernon’s club! Naturally I want him to prevail in this case, continue farming (just as he has been) and producing some of the very best dairy products that I think humanly possible!
I order as much product as I can from Vernon on a monthly basis, sometime twice a month. I have absolutely no complaint about any of his products.
Then there is the matter of the legal attack by the State of Wisconsin.
This is not the first attack against a farmer for providing nutrient-dense foods for his community. These attacks have been occurring for several years. Much has been said and much more can be said about what is involved with these attacks. I generally agree with the assessments that the source of the attacks originate out of the interests of mega food. I don’t think that is difficult for people to understand (unless they refuse to hear about it). What may be difficult to realize is that the legal reality here
(and in many other cases) goes beyond the issue at hand and it is this legal reality that needs to be fully identified so that can it be as clearly understood as is "“the raw milk controversy"” (even though I have said there is no controversy about this real milk).
As a friend of the farmers, a passionate American and a lover of humanity I am calling attention to the need to understand the true limits of governmental jurisdiction. This need for understanding is indicated by the statement:
"“Dairyman Vernon Hershberger is a symbol of food rights and freedoms for all U.S. citizens"”.:
http://hartkeisonline.com/2013/04/30/vernon-hershberger-case-puts-food-freedo...
This statement essentially identifies all Americans as
"“U.S. citizens”". As long as Americans (living in the United States of America) identify themselves as "United States citizens" they unknowingly volunteer into, what amounts to legally as, a foreign jurisdiction. That's because when we talk about the legal realm we must understand the legal
definitions and not rely on conventional wisdom for terms and phrases that we may use in our everyday or non-legal conversations.
The term "“United States"” has several distinct meanings. The one that is most pertinent for or regarding "“United States citizens”" is the one that properly identifies that term (AKA “"citizens of the United States”") as per the “Fourteenth Amendment” (of 1868) in the "“Constitution for the United
States of America”" of September 17, 1787. However, the “Constitution for the United States of America” of September 17, 1787 is just the fourth Organic Law and like the pillars in a temple, they all stand together. Most Americans know the first Organic Law: "“The Declaration of Independence”"
(DoI). However, there are two more Organic Laws that Ameircans need to become about as familiar with as the DoI. Otherwise the proper understanding for “United States” can most likely not be had. That is because the term has a very specific meaning given to it in the third Organic Law: “"Ordinance of 1787: The Northwest Territorial Government"”
(which was originally intended to be a temporary government but was made permanent via the Constitution of September 17, 1787). That is why I have repeatedly blogged on this particular subject at my CureZone Blogs (including “Son of Truth of Self”).
We Americans have been schooled into believing that we are "U.S. citizens" because these individuals are legally subject to the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of Congress and by extension through all the (federal) “states” since they are under federal rule. Does Vernon live in such a (federal) state? It seems he thinks so and yet only he can say. If Vernon or anyone reads the four Organic Laws they can then follow the perfect logic that is articulated by
my law professor Ed Rivera as to how the “United States” are actually the distinct federal territories, federal lands within the exterior boarders of the several states and other federal possessions that are subject to the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of Congress. As far as I know
Vernon is not on federal land. He was born in Ohio and not on a federal territory!. He is truly a red-blooded American and a “free-inhabitant” in Wisconsin. (You’ll find the term “free inhabitants” in the second organic law: "“Articles of Confederation”".)
"The people parish for lack of knowledge." It is for this reason that the truth of the organic laws is deliberately not fully revealed to the American people. For with this knowledge we would realize that we already have all the Rights that we were born with, including the Right to be left alone (no trespassing by agents under color of law). But in order to assert those Rights we need to know the proprietary limits of government that are written in the organic laws; otherwise we are fooling ourselves by believing in the lies that every geographic location across the United States of America is only what the government wants us to believe it is.
The truth will free you from all those lies! Read the organic laws and add substance, from the original source, to your stand for every farmer "under siege".
Chef Jem
AKA Mixologist
|
|
|
Mixologist
|
|
|
|
CureZone